Re: Officiating and the VR : Sun Mar 24, 2019 11:46 am  

I am not interested in

1. Hearing the refs voice.
2. Hearing endless commentary about referees decisions.
3. Hearing a referee commentator (FFS how did it come to this)
4. Watching a replay screen on referee decisions.

I just want to see high impact, aggressive, fast, skillful, honest sport played by athletes amid fierce northern rivalry played on the cusp of the rules with no quarter asked or given.

Re: Officiating and the VR : Sun Mar 24, 2019 12:54 pm  

Indeed. Hopefully with Eddie and that godawful producer leaving at least the presentation can improve tenfold. Just bloody commentate on what is occurring in front if your eyes instead of chopping and changing the so called narrative that Hemmings wants to impose on the game and change at will - amazing comeback, massive injury list, off field problems blah blah blah. God i hope the next commentator is decent and all the pundits go - except for Clarke and Carney, the former I don't mind at all.

Re: Officiating and the VR : Sun Mar 24, 2019 1:09 pm  

mikej wrote:

The game is propped up by TV money. Doesnt mean it has to be SKY. Other companies have offered better deals but the RFL simply keep going back to their chums.

Mike, what TV companies offered a better deal.
A genuine question because I wasn't aware of any other companies.

Re: Officiating and the VR : Sun Mar 24, 2019 5:01 pm  

lefty goldblatt wrote:

Just happened.
Saints' Coote has just done a goal line drop out, AFTER the shot clock has run out. Why no penalty?
WE HAVE A RULE.

That’s was just Sky’s shot clock that the commentators made their decision from. In reality the real shot clock may have been a second or two later at starting and the Castleford stadium hooter would have sounded if the time has ran out as I can’t see Cas being involved in an agenda to help Saints rack up some points.

Re: Officiating and the VR : Sun Mar 24, 2019 5:06 pm  

Wires71 wrote:

I am not interested in

1. Hearing the refs voice.
2. Hearing endless commentary about referees decisions.
3. Hearing a referee commentator (FFS how did it come to this)
4. Watching a replay screen on referee decisions.

I just want to see high impact, aggressive, fast, skillful, honest sport played by athletes amid fierce northern rivalry played on the cusp of the rules with no quarter asked or given.

1. I agree to a certain extent. Hearing his voice on tele - especially on Sky as there’s always about three people speaking at once in commentary at the same time - just gets mumbled up into a really poor outlay of voice noise with the match commentator. But I’d like to hear the ref when he’s speaking to the captain and when he sends something to the VR

2. I agree. Commentary - especially on Sky with any of around five people in the commentary gantry, sometimes a few speaking at once. And I want to hear simple commentary from the commentator and punditry about tactics; not continual hot topic conversations about rules and ref decisions

3. I agree we really don’t want need Cummings at all!

4. No harm in that for me, stops the possibility of corruption

Re: Officiating and the VR : Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:06 am  

lefty goldblatt wrote:

The Mamo "no try", where, let's face it, Thaler wasn't concentrating, Mamo made his attempt, and as an afterthought, Thaler poohed his pants, and thought, better let that go upstairs and let them decide. WHAT IS THE POINT OF ALL THIS TRY OR NO TRY? If you've not seen it, let someone else decide, WITHOUT giving the VR a leading decision. There was no clear way even superslow TV replays could decide whether the ball had touched the deadball line, so a try SHOULD have been given. Speccies go to games to see tries. Not no tries.

The thing that struck me about this decision was the lack of different camera angles that were shown. From behind the posts, it looked like a tiny part of the ball might just about have touched the line, but that angle can be deceptive. We really needed to see it from a side-on camera, but strangely enough, that didn't happen.

Re: Officiating and the VR : Wed Mar 27, 2019 1:35 pm  

The Speculator wrote:

The thing that struck me about this decision was the lack of different camera angles that were shown. From behind the posts, it looked like a tiny part of the ball might just about have touched the line, but that angle can be deceptive. We really needed to see it from a side-on camera, but strangely enough, that didn't happen.

From memory the ball was grounded point down. Consequently by applying a bit of simple geometry, the centre of the ball must have touched grass before the outer edge touched the white line - TRY.

Re: Officiating and the VR : Wed Mar 27, 2019 2:51 pm  

The radio commentators were apoplectic because Thaler had given a penalty against us for feet up in the scrum. That went out when Leeds's forward passes started being ignored.

Re: Officiating and the VR : Wed Mar 27, 2019 4:31 pm  

silver2 wrote:

From memory the ball was grounded point down. Consequently by applying a bit of simple geometry, the centre of the ball must have touched grass before the outer edge touched the white line - TRY.

Maths was never my strong point Silver, but wouldn’t the ball have to be a) totally pointed like a sharp pencil and b) perfectly perpendicular for that level of certainty to apply?
For what it’s worth I thought it was a try, but also Mamo did incredibly well to get round the Wakey lump and ground the ball, what an athlete!

Re: Officiating and the VR : Fri Mar 29, 2019 1:02 pm  

Wires71 wrote:

Which organisation has offered better deals and when?

IIRC

In 2007 Setanta, but the RFL simply used it as a means of upping SKYs offer and then it was rumoured that BT Sports were interested in bidding from 2016 but when it appeared clear the RFL were simply renewing with SKY, BT Sport put the money into making sure they secured access to Premier League.